Retina lenses compared

[JPD]

Nothing scientific, but I took some test shots with my Retina IIc cameras with Xenon and Heligon and their tele and wide lenses, plus with my Ib with Xenar and pre-war IIa with 2,8 Xenon (actually a five element Xenar). I didn't sharpen the scans, but flickr did with it's automatic resizing.

Full frames:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1094/4731638466_935f21434c_b.jpg

2,8/50 Xenon and Heligon C:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1338/4730941041_c3ca4c6a45_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1244/4730941141_7833630c1a_b.jpg

5,6/35 Curtar-Xenon and Heligon C:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1035/4730941195_4a46cf0405_b.jpg

4/80 Longar-Xenon and Heligon C:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1331/4730941357_8eff792aa6_b.jpg

Ib 2,8/50 Xenar and uncoated pre-war 2,8/50 Xenon:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1115/4730941495_38454e968a_b.jpg

Edge sharpness. Ib with it's four element Xenar compared to the six element Xenon on the IIc:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1110/4731075015_858a0d9074_b.jpg

The Xenar is VERY sharp also at the edges stopped down to 8-11, where it matches the six element lenses. It also feels a little bit contrastier (that can't be seen in my bad scans though).

 

[RichL]

Thanks for the real world tests JBD. For me they are much more usable than tables of lines per millimeter and all the rest of the numbers being tossed around.

 

[JPD]

One thing I learned was that if I can afford to stop down to 8 or 11, and have no need for the rangefinder, then the Ib with Xenar wins over the more expensive IIc with Heligon!

The largest aperture I used was 4, because it gave the fastest shutter speed 1/500. Controlled lighting and a test chart would have been better, but that's too much mumbo jumbo for me as a user.

 

[RichL]

I'm typically a daytime shooter and keep the camera at 8 or 11 unless there are shadow details I want to keep. If the day is heavily overcast I load up with HP5 otherwise it's either Ilford PanF or FP4.